5289 CRB-5-07-10 (2009). Torres v. New England Masonry Company et al.
Court | Connecticut |
Connecticut Workers Compensation
2009.
5289 CRB-5-07-10 (2009).
Torres v. New England Masonry Company et al
CASE NO. 5289
CRB-5-07-10COMPENSATION REVIEW BOARD
WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION JANUARY 6, 2009MILTON TORRES CLAIMANT-APPELLANT v. NEW
ENGLAND MASONRY COMPANY EMPLOYER and YANKEE NEWS EMPLOYER and HANOVER INSURANCE
COMPANY CNA INSURANCE BROADSPIRE INSURERS RESPONDENTS-APPELLEESAPPEARANCES: The claimant appeared
pro se. The respondents New England Masonry Company and Hanover Insurance were
represented by Charlene Russo, Esq., Law Office of Charlene Russo, Suite 400,
95 Glastonbury Boulevard, Glastonbury, CT 06033. The respondent Yankee News and
CNA were represented by Paul M. Pieszak, Esq., Law Offices of Cynthia Jaworski,
55 Capital Boulevard, Suite 210, Rocky Hill, CT 06067. The respondents Yankee
News and Broadspire were represented by Richard Stabnick, Esq., Pomeranz,
Drayton & Stabnick, 95 Glastonbury Boulevard, Glastonbury, CT 06033.
However, they did not file a brief nor appear at oral argument. This Petition
for Review from the October 19, 2007 Finding and Dismissal of the Commissioner
acting for the Fifth District was heard October 24, 2008 before a Compensation
Review Board panel consisting of Commissioners Ernie R. Walker, Stephen B.
Delaney and Peter C. Mlynarczyk. OPINION
ERNIE R. WALKER,
COMMISSIONER. The question before this panel in the present appeal is
whether the trial commissioner had sufficient grounds to determine the claimant
failed to prove his hip condition was the result of a compensable injury. The
claimant has suffered two compensable injuries. The first injury occurred when
the claimant fell off a scaffold July 8, 1993 which resulted in a right leg
laceration, a right knee injury, and right elbow injury. The second injury
occurred January 17, 1998 when the claimant fell while delivering newspapers
and injured his knee. Conflicting evidence was presented to the trial
commissioner as to whether the claimant's hip condition was caused by these
compensable injuries. We find the trial commissioner had sufficient probative
evidence to support his Finding and Dismissal; hence we affirm his decision and
dismiss this appeal. The trial commissioner found the following facts after a lengthy
formal hearing process. Noting the aforementioned compensable injuries, the
commissioner focused on the compensability of a right and left hip condition,
commonly known as bilateral avascular necrosis. The claimant contended the
bilateral avascular necrosis was a compensable injury arising out of the July
8, 1993 or the January 17, 1998 injury, and or repetitive trauma. The
respondents contested the compensability of this injury.
The commissioner found that following the claimant's...
To continue reading
Request your trial